Play '39 scen twice (going to start a third this weekend or early next week). Both as US-GB-FR-USSR-Canada (once on easy and once on normal). All Axis on AI normal both times. First game Berlin fell to USSR in fall 43. Second game it fell to USSR early winter 44. Both games German units captured only one USSR city. Both games France lasted until summer 41 with little British help. Wonder how long it would have lasted if I'd sent British Army to France instead of North Africa? Both games German AI focused production on tech. Both games all INF, ARM, and AIR units were level 5 in mid-43. With that much production going to "light bulbs" and upgrading units, doesn't leave much for buying additional units. Both games Germany didn't even try to invade Norway. Both games US/GB invaded France in summer 43. Long story short (I know, too late), I think maybe you went a little too far balancing the German AI vs USSR human issue. Thanks for listening.

Thanks for repling. I'll give another fast AAR after my next game. I'm guessing my major point got lost in the long message. My fault. I meant my biggest question/comment to deal with the German AI focusing so much on TECH and upgrading units instead of balancing it with new units. It seemed Germany didn't have enough units to invade USSR (fog of war was off so I could see all the German army). True the units Germany had were powerful (one German armor army was 50 in summer '43), but I was able to reduce them with air support then surround them. Still enjoying the game.

I would stand away from calling USSR and Allies as allies. They were fighting the same enemy, their only common goal is to beat the Germany. Please remember that when Winter War has started Western Allies become to plan operation against SU. This is one of thereasons why they were able to react so quick after the German invasion on Norway. Also as soon as the war has ended, both sides were "ready" for third war. This is why USSR and Western Allies are different aliances in the game.

As promised I finished another '39 scen as the British, US, France, Canada, USSR and neutral countries as the Axis invaded. Everyone set at normal. I won't bother you with all the details. This game was much much different than my first two. But some things were the same. Allies (and Brits) won. Berlin fell in Nov 44 to Brits. Last Axis to fall was Italy in June 45. It was a very exciting game especially on the Eastern Front up until the last couple months of '44. Here are some observations ... - Germany focused production on Tech. Level 4 and 5 for ARM, INF, and aircraft in summer '43. So, the units Germany did have were very powerful but numbers were limited. This has happened in all three of my games. - USA ended up being a role player to the Brits throughout the war. At end of game Tech level was 3 but most of the game was at 1 and 2. Had 2 Armor Armies, 1 Armor Corps, 1 fighter, and 1 tact. Build only 1 additional ship, a carrier. Not sure what I was doing wrong with US production but everytime I built something seemed to take forever to build up enough to build something else. Then add to that a light bulb or two and enough transports to get units to France plus carry supplies and you see why I couldn't seem make the US a major player. My problem? Games? Not a problem but an intentional game balance? - Saw a number of strange German reinforcement placements. On the front lines where Allies/USSR could easily destroy them while they were still 0-0. This happend a number of times. - The war on the Eastern Front was very exciting because both sides had few units. German "death stars" ate up the pre-war Soviet INF but as they advanced they had no INF support. I'd build one or two soviet INF a turn to use as speed bumps while saving production for armor units. After about a year there were hardly any Soviet INF on the map. But Germany didn't have any either (see first bullet). So it came down to a few strong German armor units at the end of a long supply line against a few weaker Soviets armor units. Germany did take Moscow in summer "42 but lost it quickly when the armor units tried to move deeper. I retook Moscow after 2 or 3 turns then isolated the German armor. Turning point of the war. Overall, only reason I was able to pull it out was becauses of a number of questionable moves I'm sure a human player wouldn't make. So considering the problems of AI, I'd say it was a reasonably balanced fight,exciting, and fun. - France fell in May 41 with no British support except aircraft (my decision to go for North Africa instead of helping France). Eastern Front attach started August 41. - Britian was the major player on the Western Front. I seemed to be able to build British forces faster than US.

Again, I realize a lot of this is my game style (North Africa instead of France. no Italy invasion but an earlier France invasion, etc) and people will experience different things. But the reoccuring things I've seen in 3 games is German focusing heavily on tech and not buying many new units. Germany placing reinforcements where the Allies or Soviets could easily destroy them at 0-0. I enjoyed my last game very much and looking forward to my next.

Next up ... hmmm, how about Germany, Italy, and Romania in the '41 scen. I won't bother you folks with an AAR unless something really strange happens.

I would stand away from calling USSR and Allies as allies. They were fighting the same enemy, their only common goal is to beat the Germany. Please remember that when Winter War has started Western Allies become to plan operation against SU. This is one of thereasons why they were able to react so quick after the German invasion on Norway. Also as soon as the war has ended, both sides were "ready" for third war. This is why USSR and Western Allies are different aliances in the game.

Didn't really intend my post as any sort of political commentary on the anti-Axis powers in Europe.

As to playing the game are you saying that it is designed and optimised for the player vs the AI to play only one of Allies (i.e UK, USA, France, Poland) or USSR but not to play both at the same time ?

I've played the 1945 beta build 90 scenario both ways against the AI with the 1.06 exe. I have a few comments regarding it's behavior.

As the Allies I found that all I had to do was bring in my American and British fleets into the Baltic to affect the Soviet/Warsaw Pact AI. If left alone the Soviet AI does a nifty first turn attack on the Canadiens up north near Denmark. When I bring the American and British fleets in and do bombardment on the northernmost tank army plus air strikes on it and other nearby units then the Soviet AI cancels the attack and then pulls back all the mechanized infantry armies, leaving the tank armies stuck in the front lines alone. Regardless of whether a human player does this trick or not the Soviet AI should maintain a solid front line. Once I was able to push units around to surround those tank armies they fell pretty easily. The AI's must be given better programming so they maintain solid front lines in any scenario.

The USA AI tries too many invasions, and in bad places. It's really stupid to force the American and British AI's to invade around Riga and Koenigsberg, they can never really keep up those invasions with enough reinforcements. A foolish harry high school ploy for a turn but long term a really dumb move for the Artificial Ignorance. Late in my one game the American and British AI's invaded and took Koenigsberg which caused me a little consternation for a turn but I brought in reserves and bottled it up and squashed it within a few turns. That allowed me to finish up mopping up France as the Soviet player. The American and British AI's need to keep their forces up on the European mainland, that's where the game is won or lost. They don't do a good job of defending Western Europe.

I don't think the AI's do strategic bombing very well, I just didn't see any AI strategic bombing attacks in the 1945 scenario and never a single atomic bomb attack when it had a-bombs a plenty.

The American and British AI's should be given zones to work in, British should be used in Iraq and Greece plus northern Germany while the American AI focuses on central Germany down towards Greece. I've seen too many instances of where the AI's get in each other's way and then neither does well against the enemy. Omnius

Actually the AI is not bad when it gets enough resources. I would consider the normal setting for MP only, generally I set all the human controlled countries to "hard" and all AI ones to "very easy". Actually giving AI more PPs has a bigger influence on the difficulty than taking away them from the player.

_____________________________

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - G.B. Shaw

Actually the AI is not bad when it gets enough resources. I would consider the normal setting for MP only, generally I set all the human controlled countries to "hard" and all AI ones to "very easy". Actually giving AI more PPs has a bigger influence on the difficulty than taking away them from the player.

Borsook, I'm not much interested in playing a beggar's game depriving myself of PP's while giving the Artificial Ignorance way too many. That just destroys the historical balance. Omnius